| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
A patch went in (in 4aaf747) without a proper signed-off-by
because the project (in its upstream repository) does not use
Git.
This will take care of that before spreading the patch to
other branches.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Respect GTKDOC_ENABLED when inheriting python3native and DEPENDing on
qemu-native, as they're not needed when disabled.
python3native is required as otherwise the host Python is most likely used which
may or may not have python3-six installed (a requirement of gtk-doc).
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
libfm uses glib-gettextize so explicitly depend on glib-2.0-native.
Instead of depending on gettext-native, inherit gettext.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
valgrind currently does not know anything about the CPUID flag added to
the HWCAP auxv entry in kernel 4.11+
At runtime it will fails like this:
ARM64 front end: branch_etc
disInstr(arm64): unhandled instruction 0xD5380001
disInstr(arm64): 1101'0101 0011'1000 0000'0000 0000'0001 ==2082==
valgrind: Unrecognised instruction at address 0x4014e64.
This patch is a workaround by masking all HWCAP. This patch is dervied
from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464211
Signed-off-by: Manjukumar Matha <manjukumar.harthikote-matha@xilinx.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
If you have a package that does not generate a manifest due to using a
noexec rule, the package name should be printed so the problem can be
tracked down. With out the patch you get an error that makes it look
more like the package_manager is broken as shown below.
oe-core/meta/lib/oe/package_manager.py', lineno: 534, function: create_packages_dir
0530:
0531: for dep in rpmdeps:
0532: c = taskdepdata[dep][0]
0533: manifest, d2 = oe.sstatesig.find_sstate_manifest(c, taskdepdata[dep][2], taskname, d, multilibs)
*** 0534: if not os.path.exists(manifest):
0535: continue
0536: with open(manifest, "r") as f:
0537: for l in f:
0538: l = l.strip()
File: '/usr/lib/python3.5/genericpath.py', lineno: 19, function: exists
0015:# This is false for dangling symbolic links on systems that support them.
0016:def exists(path):
0017: """Test whether a path exists. Returns False for broken symbolic links"""
0018: try:
*** 0019: os.stat(path)
0020: except OSError:
0021: return False
0022: return True
0023:
Exception: TypeError: stat: can't specify None for path argument
Signed-off-by: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
This has been fixed upstream since 008, albeit slightly differently so the patch
continued to apply.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The taskset command is provided by both busybox and util-linux.
Signed-off-by: Lars Persson <larper@axis.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
This error can appear in gdb/nat/linux-ptrace.c because of
the order in which some headers are processed:
| In file included from ../../gdb-7.11.1/gdb/nat/linux-ptrace.c:20:0:
| ../../gdb-7.11.1/gdb/nat/linux-ptrace.h:175:22: error: expected identifier before numeric constant
| # define TRAP_HWBKPT 4
| ^
| Makefile:2357: recipe for target 'linux-ptrace.o' failed
| make[2]: *** [linux-ptrace.o] Error 1
| make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
| make[2]: Leaving directory '/oe/build/tmp-rpb-glibc/work/aarch64-linaro-linux/gdb/7.11.1-r0/build-aarch64-linaro-linux/gdb'
| Makefile:8822: recipe for target 'all-gdb' failed
| make[1]: *** [all-gdb] Error 2
| make[1]: Leaving directory '/oe/build/tmp-rpb-glibc/work/aarch64-linaro-linux/gdb/7.11.1-r0/build-aarch64-linaro-linux'
| Makefile:846: recipe for target 'all' failed
| make: *** [all] Error 2
A patch from GDB's current master solves the issue.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Patch submitted upstream, pending to be merged:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21286
Signed-off-by: Fathi Boudra <fathi.boudra@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Various builds of e2fsprogs 1.43.7 package locales which may or may
not have POT-Creation-Date removed. There is no obvious pattern, it
affects different locales each time, the build being non-deterministic.
The root cause was tracked to non-deterministic time stamps (as GIT does
not preserve file mktime), so some "make" rules sometimes fired, sometimes
did not.
The remedy is to explicitly "touch" files that cause non-deterministic build.
[YOCTO #12516]
Signed-off-by: Juro Bystricky <juro.bystricky@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Some implementations of GBM, like the one included with
libMali, do not have gbm_bo_map() nor gbm_bo_unmap().
This patch enables kmscube to work with those implementations
even if it doesn't work as great.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
We should use the value of CC for the c compiler setting in cross
compilation configuration file for meson. For example, if we only
use ${HOST_PREFIX}gcc instead of ${CC}, we would meet the following
do_compile failure for systemd.
cc1: fatal error: linux/capability.h: No such file or directory
Do the same change for LD, AR, NM, STRIP and READELF.
Signed-off-by: Chen Qi <Qi.Chen@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
* Enable ptest using new ptest-perl.bbclass
Signed-off-by: Tim Orling <timothy.t.orling@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Needed by dtdiff which calls `diff` to display its result.
Signed-off-by: Ioan-Adrian Ratiu <adi@adirat.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Required by the new dtc rdepends to avoid errors like this:
ERROR: Required build target 'ionel-rpi-image' has no buildable providers.
Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['ionel-rpi-image', 'nativesdk-packagegroup-sdk-host', 'nativesdk-qemu', 'nativesdk-dtc', 'nativesdk-diffutils']
Signed-off-by: Ioan-Adrian Ratiu <adi@adirat.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Many go packages can take advantage of dep tool since
they manage their own dependencies, this class helps
in using go dep tool for such packages
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
to allow GOVERSION to be set for using an older
go toolchain.
Signed-off-by: Matt Madison <matt@madison.systems>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
since GO_LDFLAGS is also used by the dist tool, and it's confusing
to use a variable with the same name (but not exported, so unused
by make.bash/dist).
Signed-off-by: Matt Madison <matt@madison.systems>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
to allow go programs to be linked either statically or
dynamically when cross-compiling with the SDK.
Signed-off-by: Matt Madison <matt@madison.systems>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
The statically-linked Go code in the toolchain is not compatible
with PIE, so disable its use in the C compiler during the
toolchain build.
Signed-off-by: Matt Madison <matt@madison.systems>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
With go1.10 the NOPIE flags are only required for
MIPS target builds, and are now incompatible for
the other architectures.
Signed-off-by: Matt Madison <matt@madison.systems>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
|
Eliminate some redundancy in the recipes by moving
some commonly-used variable settings to the common
include file. Also removed a duplicate inherit
from go-target.inc that was already in go-common.inc.
Signed-off-by: Matt Madison <matt@madison.systems>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
|
Daniel Díaz
Ross Burton
Manjukumar Matha
Jason Wessel
Lars Persson
Fathi Boudra
Juro Bystricky
Chen Qi
Tim Orling
Ioan-Adrian Ratiu
Khem Raj
Matt Madison